Comparison of Three Tracheal Intubation Procedures Using Personal Protective Equipment, Direct and Video Laryngoscopes: An Open, Randomized, Parallel Clinical Trial.

Abstract

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, severe respiratory failure is a life-threatening condition, and life-saving tracheal intubation is a high-risk aerosol- and droplet-generating procedure. It is crucial to protect healthcare workers without compromising patient safety during intubation. The use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and different types of laryngoscopes are measures to reduce the risk of infectious transmission that might impact the intubation process.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different levels of PPE and types of laryngoscopes on the duration of the intubation process and its success rate.

Methods: We conducted an open, randomized, parallel clinical trial on non-COVID-19 adult patients scheduled for elective and emergency surgeries under general anesthesia from November 2021 to May 2022. Patients were divided into three groups: Group 1 was intubated using a video-guided laryngoscope with operators wearing level three PPE; group 2 was intubated using a direct laryngoscope with operators wearing level three PPE; and group 3 was intubated using a direct laryngoscope with operators wearing level two PPE. Intubation was performed by 2nd- and 3rd-year anesthesia residents.

Results: The duration of intubation varied significantly among the groups, with Group 1 taking the longest time (P = 0.046). Group 3 had a higher success rate for first-attempt intubation (P = 0.056).

Conclusions: The use of PPE and video-guided laryngoscopy had varying effects on the intubation procedure, with the most notable impact being on the overall length of intubation. Further research with a larger sample size is needed to validate these findings.